You lost me Jason... what extra tags are you referring to? My proposal specifically didn't require any new tags, only additions to the existing ones.
-- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com On Mon, April 18, 2005 2:43 pm, Jason King said: > Frank, > What do we need extra tags for? We already have hooks to call > javascript functions, whether those functions run 100% client-side or > interact through an xmlhttp object or even through a 1x1 pixel iframe > should be totally unknown to the individual input elements. > Frank W. Zammetti wrote: > >>You are correct Joe, I made no attempt whatsoever to solve that >> situation. >> >>In short (relatively!), for anyone trying to get a grasp on it, my >>proposal boils down to this: >> >>We have these Struts tags that everyone (except ironically me, most of >> the >>time!) uses. These tags have various event handlers attached to them. >>These event handlers are client-side Javascript functions that do >> whatever >>it is they do. We also have this AJAX thingamajig, whereby a client >> calls >>on a server, gets a response, and, usually, updates just a part of a web >>page. Rather than develop a whole new taglib with AJAX at its center >>(which isn't a bad idea as an aside), why not just modify the existing >>Struts tags to have some at least minimal AJAX functionality? But what >>does that really mean? Simply put, instead of calling some Javascript >>function on the client in response to, say, the onClick event of a >> button, >>we instead call a server-side process, get a response back and update >> some >>part of the page. The point here is that you continue to use the existing >>tags that you know and, presumably!, love... your existing pages don't >> get >>broken, you don't have to rewrite anything, but you can now introduce >> this >>AJAX stuff as needed without having to write all the details yourself. >>Further, what if what was provided included a number of "standard" >>functions that would cover maybe 90% of the situations you might want to >>use AJAX, like updating the innerHTML of a span? What if you could send >>and received XML, or not, at your discretion? What if the extra cost of >>all this was an updated JAR, a Struts plug-in, a single new XML >>configuration file, and an ID added to any form tag you wanted to have >>this AJAX capability? That, in a nutshell, is my proposal. >> >>I was not seeking to recreate the world in an AJAX image, and I was not >>trying to cover every possible scenario that could arise. My goal was to >>expand what exists and what people use, giving them some extra >>functionality they didn't have before. Those that needed more >> flexibility >>and power would likely know to look elsewhere, those that had minimal >>requirements or otherwise didn't have the requisite expertise just yet >>could stay play with AJAX. >> >>I wasn't trying to create a Lexus, just a Yugo :) >> >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
